Thursday, March 10, 2011

How the AMSA Loves Naturopathy - Enough to Promote Naturopathic Opacity and Have ND D'Adamo Speak at AMSA's 2011 Convention

here, I cite from the naturopathy promotion page of the American Medical Student Association [see 001., below]; then, from their promotional material which states that ND D'Adamo will speak at their 2011 convention [see 002., below]:

001. AMSA states in "Naturopathic Medicine" [saved 2011-03-10]:

"naturopathic medicine has as its basis the premise that the body has an innate intelligent force [IIF] capable of healing itself [coded vitalism] and our duty as physicians is to support that process by stimulating that force [coded vitalism...] naturopathic physicians (NDs) attend 4 year full-time residential medical schools and are primary care providers trained in conventional medical sciences [...] all licensed NDs must complete four years of graduate medical education at a school accredited by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education (CNME) and pass a two-step board examination (similar to USMLE Steps 1 and 2) [NPLEX]. Currently, 16 states, the District of Columbia and the US territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands have licensing laws for naturopathic doctors."

Note: now for some information.  That IIF is a coding for the science-ejected idea of vitalism.  There is no such force, scientifically speaking.  It's nonsense.  How do you stimulate a figmentation?  Now, a science background is claimed for NDs, but isn't it a basic premise of science that you actually have EVIDENCE?  Where is the evidence of this IIF figmentation?  Aren't IQs dropping at the medical doctorate level! Without such evidence, but in still claiming such via science, naturopathy is a belief system falsely posing as scientifically based.  The schools of the CNME in fact label the science-ejected science, on their own web pages.  The exam labels same said.  The oversight organizations at the '.gov' state level also perpetrate this falsehood.  Why would AMSA want to be involved with this?  Why doesn't AMSA state this actual context on their naturopathy web page, and instead is complicit in this manipulative opacity?


"[Rebecca Snowden posts] hello convention-goers! I want to take this moment to explain to you all a jewel that awaits you at Convention.  Dr. Peter D'Adamo will be presenting on the implementation of holistic principles into modern medical practice [...via] personalized genomics [...] he is known to millions of readers worldwide for his New York Times bestselling Eat Right For Your Type [BTD] series of books, which detail the link between blood group polymorphisms, secretory variations in the gut, and their consequential use in nutritional and dietary optimization."

Note: regarding the BTD, the Mayo Clinic has this to say: "there's no sound scientific evidence that the so-called blood type diet is any more effective or any more beneficial for weight loss than is any other diet [...] there's no solid research evidence to support claims about a blood type diet."  Time Magazine had this to say about D'Adamo's genotype diet: "if there's anything scientifically sound about any of this, we haven't seen the signs."

Great company AMSA keeps.  Quite a jewel.  I'd argue that a chief holistic / naturopathic principle is to label as science that which is not.  Period.  Be it vitalism, supernaturalism, the science-ejected, the science-unsupported, the science-exterior. D'Adamo is a Bastyr grad., and their motto is that within science is the science-ejected vitalistic and supernatural.  Enough said.
Post a Comment